It's Evolution Stupid Analysis

In the global market that we leave in companies are trying to find any and everyway that they can to get ahead in their respective markets. This most of the time brings out the most innovate thinkers that can come up with a way to keep it’s company on top of their market and sometimes we see that there are companies that like to take a short cut by using non legal and malicious methods. According to Lewis, (1985), Software piracy is the illicit copying of the operating instructions and applications programs, which make computers work, is a large and growing industry. The Pirate Bay is part of a European social and political movement that opposes copyrighted content and demands that music, videos, TV shows, and other digital content be free and unrestricted. In the words of the Pirate Party, “the Pirate Bay is a unique platform for distributing culture between regular people and independent artists, and that’s something we want to preserve.”

Copyright Laws Stifle Creativity? Foratv.12 mar. 2009. Web. Nov 12, 2015. Lawrence Lessig is a professor of law at Stanford Law School and founder of the school's Center for Internet and Society. He teaches and writes in the areas of constitutional law, contracts, and the law of cyberspace. Lessig discuss the influences of “remixes” in this generation when everything can be copy and post. He stress the point of the future of originality of arts or ideas in this when everything can the forward. In this context my position was neutral, because I am not completely informed about this issue. As a result, I have not made my mind yet. Lessig is focusing on the informations that the neutral audience need in order to make a decision. He shows us relatively videos, such as the one of a mother celebrating his son, with a song in the background. Lawrence Lessig is using “Ethos,” to deliver his message. He is a recognized Law’s professor and has authority on the subject.So, automatically this impact the audience by trusting his ideas and beliefs. Additionally, I found his message to be persuasive, I would not change it. Because, he is not only an authority in this subject, but he also stress his message while using persuasive arguments. Also, he uses the media and relatively videos, that proves his point and a neutral audience can

The law must come to terms with the difference between artistic intent and economic intent. Artistic freedom is more important for the health of society than the supplemental and extraneous incomes derived from private copyright fees. They create art of police and control, since no matter how the original intent of the copyright laws are, today, they are subverted to censor resented works that suppress the public’s need to reuse and reshape

An excerpt from the article states, "People who work hard to produce creative works are entitled to enjoy legal protection to reap the benefits of their labors." Artists, actors, producers, and many other media jobs work hard to create original movies and songs to share to the public for a small cost. This small cost that is paid when their work is bought is how they put food on their table. Without the money, they may not be able to live the same lifestyle. Organizations should win legal battles over these money-stealing businesses by using emotionally charged language, so media creators are not robbed of potential money. Information found in the text expressed that the law stated that anything of value is considered property. If one downloads something from the internet that would usually cost money, they are stealing, and potential money for the creators of the media is lost. Therefore, organizations should use emotionally charged language if it means they will win more legal

Authors and publishers believe that the book industry will disintegrate through the implementation of a “fair use” system on copyright material. Authors, publishers and booksellers instigate that if recommendations for “fair use” were enacted, there would be negative ramifications on Australia’s creative content and will discourage local investment. In the Sydney Morning Herald’s article “Writers and publishers voice opposition to new copyright proposals”, Steger (2016) states ‘removal of restrictions will cut prices and accelerate supply. The so-called "fair use" system allows use of some material without payment to copyright holders’. Steger (2016) emphasises that the implementation of a copyright reform to adopt the US system of “fair use” would promote a potential fall in jobs in the sector and discourage investment. Steger (2016) also goes on to highlight the economic instability Australia’s creative content may face, instigating that a ‘fair use’ system would “destabilise an industry that contributes $7.4 billion to the Australian economy” (Appendix 2).

Copyright is the legal right, to an inventor to perform, print, publish, film, or record artistic, literary, or musical material, and to allow others to do the same. Copyright law was developed to provide the creators and inventors of any works with powerful and effective rights of exclusivity over their creations (Patterson & Lindberg, 1991). Over the past, these rights were almost unlimited. People would use existing developments as if they were their own without any regard of the creator’s exclusive rights. The need to balance and limit such rights arose, and governments established these limits for the general good of the public.

The purpose of the copyright system has always been to promote creativity in society and protect the creators’ interests. In applying copyright laws to any creation, three basic guidelines apply. First is the fair return for a creators labor, second is “Fair Use” of the creators’ labor and finally the Progress of Science and useful Arts to further the public good. The application of these three guidelines in litigation for A&M Records, Inc. v. Napster, found that the rights of reproduction, and distribution had been violated, in effect upholding the copyrights of nineteen different music companies represented under A&M Records name, this ruling had protected the music industries interests. However it would seem that the publishing industry would not be so lucky, litigation in Authors’ Guild vs. Google ruled that Google’s actions constituted fair use. Under these two scenarios’ the copyright laws’ have, effectively, protected the rights of music artists’, protected the public’s right to “fair use” and sparked new opportunities for creative growth. However, lawmakers continue to struggle to define copyright boundaries between the public’s right of use and the creators right to profit from their efforts.

Most treehoppers have an expansion of the T1 (1st thoracic segment; prothorax) dorsal sclerite which has led to a number of hypothesis for it’s evolutionary novelty (Stegmann,1998). The origin of novelty is one of the major issues in biology due to its inherent definitional variability (Brigandt & Love, 2012). According to Wagner & Lynch (2010) most definitions of evolutionary novelty can be summarized into two categories based on functional and structural novelty consisting of the genetic origin of such traits. The treehopper helmet may be considered functionally novel due to its unique adaptations to the environment. Although its morphological and genetic basis of novelty remain a controversy (Heffer & Pick, 2013).

Along with the development of a file format (MP3) to store digital audio recordings, came one of the new millennium’s most continuous debates – peer-to-peer piracy – file sharing. Internet companies such as Napster and Grokster became involved in notable legal cases in regards to copyright laws in cyberspace. These two cases are similar in nature, yet decidedly different. In order to understand the differences and similarities, one should have an understanding of each case as well as the court’s ruling.

The myth from section A I want to dispel is the third one, evolutionary change is always good and all traits are adaptive. Related to the evolution of human being, I agree that evolutionary change is good and all traits are adaptive.

Without laws to protect an individual’s work, slowly but surely, all work would become pirated and unoriginal. The term “piracy” can be traced back to the 14th century, when back then it had a different meaning than what the meaning is today. During the 14th century, piracy meant the practice of attacking and robbing ships, nowadays, however, piracy is defined as the unauthorized use

We all know that downloading pirated music and films is illegal, but what exactly is it? The term piracy refers to the copying and selling of music, films and other media illegally; in other words you are copying and selling copyrighted media without the permission of the original owner (NiDirect, n.d.). With the massive growth of the internet and its ability to store and capture vast amounts of data, we have become much more reliable on information systems in all aspects of life, but it does not come without the risk of information technology being used unethically. With the number of IT breakthroughs in recent years “the importance of ethics and human values has been underemphasised” often resulting in various consequences. Not surprisingly one of the many public concerns about the ethical use of IT is that “millions of people have downloaded music and movies at no charge and in apparent violation of copyright laws at tremendous expense to the owners of those copyrights” (Reynolds, Ethics in Information Technology, 2015). This essay covers the ethical issues of downloading pirated music and films and the impact it has on music corporations and recording and film companies.

Identify and discuss these copyright challenges in the modern digital economy using examples from case law.

The rise of the Internet era opened the whole new market for traditional media full of opportunities as well as threats. Online piracy being one of them because the music and film industry loses £5.4bn in a year and if it was reduced by 10% it could have created up to 13 thousand jobs in the UK. There are various attempts taken to fight with online piracy; a case study of Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement will be considered as well as other legislations attempting to regulate copyrights in the Internet. This

Ever since the start of illegal music downloading there has been an ongoing debate. As with any controversy, there are those whose positions stand at one end of the spectrum or the other and also those who are moderate or nonchalant. Many believe that downloading a song without paying for it is not only illegal, but also immoral. None-the less, people continue to download songs, rationalizing that the record companies are getting what they deserve after years of overpriced CD's or that the artists won't really miss the money. Some people are not sure what to make of the situation, sympathizing in some respects with either side. There are several proposed solutions to this problem, but it has become obvious that there is not easy or clear